Design Thinking Paper 12082015

An Overview of Design Thinking
By Louis Morin
Dr. Hugh Munro
MBA Director, Professor (Marketing)
Lazaridis School of Business and Economics

INTRODUCTION 1
WHAT IS DESIGN THINKING? 1
Roots of Design Thinking 1
Modes of Thinking 2
WHY DESIGN THINKING 3
DESIGN THINKING PROCESS 5
What is? – Develop a Deep Understanding of the Situation and the Customer 5
What if? – Development of Possibilities 6
What wows? Pursue Quality and Aesthetics 7
What works? – The Build – Measure – Learn Feedback Loop 8
SKILLS OF A DESIGN THINKER 9
Imagination 10
Story 10
Empathy 10
Build Shared Understanding 11
Design is Action Oriented 11
SENSIBILITIES OF A DESIGN THINKER 12
Description of Design Sensibility 12
Zen – An example of an integrated design sensibility 14
IMPLEMENTING DESIGN THINKING IN AN ORGANIZATION 15
Agency 16
Address Longer Term Problems 16
Flow of Work 16
Encourage Experimentation and Respect Failure 17
EXHIBITS 18

1
Introduction
What is Design Thinking?
Design thinking is an approach to creating the future of a business where the focus
is on imagining future possibilities for the business or its products. “Designers
invent a different future.”1 “
Design thinking deals with
primarily what does not yet
exist.”2
Roots of Design Thinking
Design thinking developed
from architecture and product
design. Where architects and
industrial designers develop an
idea for a building or
production. For example, in the
drawing to the right, one can see an image for Michelangelo’s drawing3 of St. Peter’s
Cathedral in Rome.
From architectural design, design thinking extended into product design. The
following image shows a drawing4 and photos for a gripper toothbrush by Oral-B.
1 Liedtka, J. Strategy as Design. P. 22.
3 Backtoclassics.com. Project for St Peter's in Rome by Michelangelo Buonarroti.
4 Caula, R. Designboom. (2014, February 28)
Figure1 - Michelangelo's Drawing for St. Peter's inRome.

2
While the process of Design Thinking evolved from architectural principle, it is
being extended beyond into
domains like organizational
design, business design,
social innovation,
education, and digital
experiences5.
Modes of Thinking
Design Thinking contrasts
with the dominant mode of thinking in organizations today where the focus on
analysis. In analytical thinking, the purpose is to understand and to make decisions
around increased levels of understanding. For example, “Inventories are too high,
sales are too low, or the customer is dissatisfied.” The answers could be, And the
focus of work would be on resolving the gap between this less than ideal state and a
specific goal. An analytical search would proceed to identify the root causes of the
problem and work towards achieving better state.
In The Second Road of Thought, by T. Golsby-Smith provides a perspective one
different types of thinking as outlined by Aristotle, he states that, “Rhetoric was the
road by which humans designed alternative futures; analytics was the road by
which we diagnosed what already exists.”6 Design thinking is an approach that uses
a rhetorical approach to design alternative futures. We cannot analyze our way into
the future. Argumentation lies at the heart of the second road. Design thinking uses
a variety of tools to encourage argumentation, like design charettes and prototyping.
These tools give people something concrete to give feedback to. According to Golby-
Smit, “Arguments are the engines by which humans create alternative futures.
Cicero claimed that all human civilization was built on the pathway of rhetoric and
5 Ideo Selected Work. (n.d.). Retrieved October 13, 2015
6 Golsby-Smith, T. The Second Road of Thought. P. 41.
Figure2 - Drawings and Final Product for Oral-B Toothbrush.

3
memorably imagined uncivilized tribes arguing their way out of caves and into
villages.”7 The table below describes the two different types of thinking described by
Aristole.
Logic Road8 Rhetoric and Topica
“If I can pull apart any system into its
working parts and explain it in cause and
effect relations, surely I will be able to
fully know the truth about the system.”
“Rhetoric was the domain where things
can be other than they are.”
Table 1 – Aristotle’s Types of Thinking.
Roger Martin in his paper Embedding Design into Business elaborates further on the
types of thinking and breaks it down into three different modes9: inductive,
deductive and adductive. The different modes are described in the table below.
Design Thinking would follow under the abductive mode.
Definition Example
Inductive
Proving through observation
that something actually works
A manufacturer analyzes it’s
products to determine the most
profitable
Deductive
Proving through reasoning and
principles that something must
be
Keep customers satisfied and
you’ll get repeat sales
Abductive
The logic of what might be –
reason that it may be
Imagine what a building would
look like
Table 2 - Modes of Thinking.
Why Design Thinking
The imperative behind Design Thinking can be captured by the following statement
made during a conversation with leaders of a major food company, a senior
executive said to the group, “In the early 2000s we became the most efficient food
company in the world; but so have our main competitors. What now?”10 The
statement is saying that companies in all industries have been pursuing process
based improvement in their organizations. However, when all competitors are
9 Martin, R. Embedding Design into Business. P. 77-78.
10 Vossoughi, S. “A Survival Guide for: The Age of Meaning. P. 59

4
pursue the same goals using the same methods, none of the companies will develop
a differentiable competitive advantage.
Furthermore, the speed of change is increasing very rapidly. For example,
Buckminster Fuller invented something called the, “Knowledge Doubling Curve,” in
which he stated that until 1900 human knowledge doubled every century, and then
by the end of World War II knowledge was doubling every 25 years. Today, on
average human knowledge is doubling every 13 months. According to IBM, the
build out of the “internet of things” will lead to the doubling of knowledge every
twelve hours11. While different domains of knowledge may develop at different
rates, or the rates of knowledge development may differ across industries. The
implications of the rapid rate of knowledge development for an individual business
is staggering. Knowledge could develop very rapidly that would make a business
irrelevant.
Knowledge development can be viewed as a metric for the pace of change, and along
with the globalization of markets and competition, the expansion of the service-
based economy, the impact of deregulation and privatization, and the explosion of
the knowledge revolution. All these forces are driving firms to fundamentally
rethink their business models and radically transform their capabilities.12 But the
question is, “How does a business radically transform?” Design Thinking offers an
approach for business to radically transform by developing new offerings
In the paper Building a Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems13, by Karen
Christen the author argues that we are now in the Age of Design and we have left the
Age of Science. In the Age of Science, the focus of human activity was on
understanding the natural world, and with this basic understanding humans could
develop technology. Technology provided humans the ability to, “harness, control,
11 Schilling, D.R. Knowledge Doubling Every 12 Months, Soon to be Every 12 Hours.
12 Martin, Roger. The Design of Business. P. 16.
13 Christensen, K. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. P. 51

5
and transform our world.” The goal was to find the right answer to a problem. In the
Age of Science, the problem, “was well understood, the stakeholders few, the
constraints stable, and in the end there was a concrete result that solved the
problem.”
Types of Problems Where Design Thinking is Useful
Analysis or inductive and deductive thinking is still useful. Those tools can be
applied successful to many problems, but increasingly the problems that
organizations face can be defined as wicked. Wicked problems have no definitive
formulation14. Problems that occur under high levels of uncertainty require a
different approach. According to, Karen Christensen, “Wicked problems demand an
opportunity-driven approach: they require making decisions, doing experiments,
launching pilot programs, testing prototypes,”15 which is a design thinking
approach.
Design Thinking Process
Jeanne Liedtka in her book, Design for Growth, proposes a design thinking process
composes of the following four phases:
What is?16
– Develop a Deep Understanding of the Situation and the Customer
14 Camillus, John C., “Strategy as a Wicked Problem”, Harvard Business Review, May,
2008, 86(5), pp. 101.
16 Liedtka, Jeanne and Ogilvie, T. Designing for Growth. P. 22.

6
In this phase of the
process, the purpose
is to make an
assessment of the
current reality and
identify the problem
or opportunity that we
want to tackle. In this
phase of the process,
the focus is one the
customers that are to
be served. Once the
target customer has been chosen the next step is to develop an understanding of the
customer and their problems. Design offers a number of tools like journey mapping
to develop a deeper understanding of the customer. In this phase, a lot of Design
Thinking practitioners focus on developing a deep understanding of what the
customer is with the purpose of understanding their experience.
What if? – Development of Possibilities
With a situation analysis and an understanding of the customer, a design thinking
practitioner will develop ideas or intuitive insights as to possibilities for the current
situation. In this stage, we begin to explore possibilities for what a desirable future
might look like. In this stage, it is important not limit oneself to what one believes is
possible. To achieve breakthroughs, it is important to remain divergent as opposed
to start trimming or converging on specific solutions.
In this phase, design thinking practitioners will use a variety of tools like
brainstorming, concept development, visualization. One of the purposes of this
phase to develop as many concepts as possible, keeping the process divergent, and
not narrowing the solution down to quickly.
Figure3 - Design Thinking Process.

7
This is a hypothesis generating mode to identify concepts for further exploration. In
this phase, there is a risk that stakeholders in the design thinking process will want
to converge on a solution. Not coming to a solution, keeping the solution uncertain,
can make stakeholders anxious and uncomfortable. However, resolving this
uncertainty too quickly can limit possibilities. In the article, Time for Design, by
Jeanne Liedtka and Henry Mintzberg, they state that “Business leaders seeking
better design thinking should pay careful attention to the challenges of preventing
premature consensus emerging in the face of chaos, and of maintaining the fluidity
that is emerging in the face of chaos.”17
What wows? Pursue Quality and Aesthetics
The purpose of this phase to take the ideas and concepts of the previous phase and
to converge on concepts that that deliver customer value and have strong profit
potential. The first part of this process it perform assumption testing on this process
to understand the risks and opportunities associated with each concept. In this
phase, it is important to remain hypothesis driven by having a clear idea of what you
feel the customer wants and by soliciting feedback against what you are offering.
Solutions are generated through an iterative process. According to Jeanne Liedkta,
“Think of an architect’s progress through a series of representations of their work –
sketches to cardboard models, to wooden models, to 3D renderings – all before a
single shovelful of dirt has been lifted on the construction site.”18 Following the
assumption-testing phase, the next step is rapid prototyping where something
concrete enough is built to place in front of stakeholders to receive feedback.
In developing a new product or service offering, one of the goals is to produce
something of a higher standard than existing offerings in the market. According to
Jeanne Liedtka, “If you want great designs, seek simplicity, emotional engagement,
and that sweet spot between the familiar and the new. And, of course, do the job
17 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 37.
18 Liedtka, Jeanne and Ogilvie, T. Designing for Growth.

8
well. And yet, if it’s all that obvious, why are we are we surrounded by so many
mediocre designs.”19 Or for example Steve Jobs, one of the great champions of
design in the computer industry, spoke to people about, ‘being insanely great,’
telling them: ‘What you create has got to be so good that you are shocked that you
could actually create something that good.”20
What works? – The Build – Measure – Learn Feedback Loop
In this phase, a company must begin to converge on the possibilities to pursue, it
may select several of the project developed in the previous phase and begin to
develop prototypes or use design charettes and demonstrate them to customers to
solicit their feedback.
In the book, The Lean Startup, the author Eric Ries describes the Minimum Viable
Product.21 It can be described as a, “Rough,” product that lacks many features that
may prove essential later on. The purpose is to get the product in front of people
and get their feedback. Eric Ries describes a, “Build – Measure – Learn,” feedback
loop. As you move through this phase, you want to work in fast feedback cycles
trying to learn as much as possible about what the customer wants.
The iterative nature of the Build – Measure – Learn feedback loop is inherent to the
design thinking process. “After studying architects in action, philosopher and
academic David Schon described design as “a shaping process,” in which the
situation ‘talks back’ continually and ‘each move is a local experiment which
contributes to the global experiment of reframing the problem.”22
The Build – Measure – Learn approach is similar to the hypothesis-driven approach
of the traditional scientific method. According to Jeanne Leidtka the purpose of this
19 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 34
20 Brown, T. The Merits of an Evolutionary Approach to Design. P. 71.
21 Reis, Eric. The Lean Startup. P. 76-77.

9
approach is so that, “The designer substitutes mental experiments for physical
ones.23 What makes the hypothesis driven approach necessary to design thinking is
the uncertainty associated with the proposed solution. However, we should not
view the uncertainty as a barrier, to a certain extent we must, “Accept that we
cannot know all the answers before we do things.”24 According to Jeanne Liedtka,
you don’t really understand the problem until after the first prototype, and you
cannot become too attached to your initial solution and you have to prepared to
start over at least once.”25
Skills of a Design Thinker
The author C. Owen26 makes a distinction between two types of creative people. The
first group is called, “Finders”. They exercise their creativity through discovery to
find explanations for phenomena that are not well understood. In professional life,
they are scientists or scholars and are responsible for much of our progress in
understanding ourselves, and our environment. The second group is called,
“Makers,” They demonstrate their creativity through invention. Makers are driven to
synthesize what they know in new constructions, arrangements, patterns,
compositions, and concepts that bring tangible fresh expression of what can be.
Design Thinkers fall into the category of makers.
While a Finder’s purpose is to describe, a maker’s purpose is to create new objects,
products, experiences that stakeholder’s value. And to invent, Makers require a
specific set of skills including: imagination, story, empathy, building a shared
understanding, and an action-approach (practical).
24 Brown, T. The Merits of an Evolutionary Approach to Design. P 69.
25 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 37.
26 Owen, C. Design Thinking: On its Nature and Use. P. 45.

10
Imagination
One of the skills that Design Thinkers require is imagination. Imagination is a
capacity to use the mind to visualize. In the Design Thinking context, it is the
capacity to visualize, “What could be,” and then to create documents, prototypes,
and drawings that describe it. For example when Bill Stumpf, and Don Chadwick,
designed the award winning Aeron chair for Herman Miller, they had lots of detailed
consumer research from which to apply inductive reasoning and robust sets of
design principles to consider deductively. However, they used the consumer
research and design principles as a starting point: “they imagined what a chair of the
future could look like, and how that chair could forever change the way users think
about office chairs.”27
Story
In order to engage a wide variety of stakeholders, Design thinkers need to be able to
communicate effectively and to communicate effectively one needs to understand
how the human brain works. In the book, A Whole New Mind, Daniel Pink, gives two
examples. One example is written in technical jargon, and the other is written in the
form of a story. Daniel Pink then asks the user to pick which one they remember
better from the two examples. It is much easier for the reader to remember the
prose written in the story form. “Narrative imagining – story – is the fundamental
instrument of thought,” writes cognitive scientist, Mark Turner. “Rational capacities
depend on it. It is our chief means of looking into the future, of predicting, of
planning, and of explaining… Most of our experience, our knowledge and out
thinking is organized around stories.”28 In order to facilitate the development of a
shared understanding among stakeholders, stories are a key tool.
Empathy
27 Christensen, Karen. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems.
28 Pink, D. A Whole New Mind. P. 99.

11
Empathy is the capacity to understand the mental and emotional experience of
another. A Design thinker creates, “Something,” for a stakeholder, a user, or a
customer, or other interested party. Whether it is a product, experience, or service
the purpose of Design Thinking is to create of value for the stakeholders, and in
order to create value a designer must come to understand the minds of the
stakeholders to the project. To empathize with the stakeholder, design thinkers use
observational research methodologies to reveal latent needs.29 However, developing
a cursory or superficial understanding of those needs is not enough. The Design
Thinker needs to attempt to achieve a deep understanding of the user.30 To develop
that deep understanding, anthropologists have developed a tool called, “Thick
Descriptions.” For human behaviour to make sense to an outside observer, a thick
description is necessary to explain not just how people act, but the context for their
behaviour.31
Build Shared Understanding
The Design Thinker needs to build a shared understanding of the problem among
the stakeholder group. “A shared understanding of a given problem cannot be taken
for granted, and that the absence of buy-in about a problem’s definition, scope and
goals can kill a project just as sure as faulty implementation.”32 If stakeholders do
not agree on the problem, then a proposed solution may not meet on stakeholder’s
understanding of the problem. To effectively collaborate, a shared understanding of
the problem is required.
Design is Action Oriented
The purpose of the Design Thinking is not to engage in the process by to actually
implement something concrete. The Design Thinker needs to interact with
stakeholders, understand their needs, create concepts, drawings, and solicit their
29 Coughlan, P. and Prokopoff, I. Managing Change By Design. p. 100.
30 Martin, R. Designing in Hostile Territory. P.89
31 Canada, A. Mapping the Future in Uncertain Times. p. 95.

12
feedback. “Better designing – of products, organizations, strategies – holds the key
to unlocking the real potential of design for business. The basic of attributes of
successful designing are well recognized: the process is synthetic, future focused,
hypothesis-driven, and opportunistic. It involves observation, the use of frameworks
and prototyping.”33
Sensibilities of a Design Thinker
Description of Design Sensibility
Design sensibility could be described as a philosophy or an aesthetic approach.
From a musical perspective, examples of different design sensibilities could be
classical as compared to rock and roll as compared to jazz or hip-hop. Each of these
musical genres represents a different set of design principles.
Not only does design sensibility include different principles or ideas come together
in a designer’s mind to produce a work, but it also includes notions of quality. For
example, look at the images of the two offices in the exhibit below. If one were to
propose a test for someone, and ask them which office design they prefer, the
majority of people would choose the office design on the right. Both of these office
spaces were created by a design thinking process. The individuals that created both
design may or may not have been trained as designers.
The office space on the left is dark, grey, and practically colorless environment. The
principle concern of the designer would be strict functionality and cost. The office
environment practically demands of its workers to, “Get the job done,” without
concern for the health and emotional spiritual state of the workers. In contrast the
office on the right is much brighter. Aside from the blue seats, it is likewise colorless,
33 Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. P. 34

13
however the high ceilings and the white give it a much more optimistic feel and
seems to express more concern for the individuals that work there.
Figure4 - Contrasting Different OfficeDesign Aesthetics
Applying the methods of Design Thinking alone is not sufficient, the Design Thinker
must have an organized sense of a sensibility of design philosophy. This doesn’t
have to be an identity, but more of choosing a philosophy that is appropriate
environment or problem space.34 According to the authors Suri and Henrix,35 Design
sensibilities consist of the intuitive qualities such as delight, beauty, personal
meaning and cultural resonance. These subtle qualities are subjective and difficult
to articulate. In the pictures of the office space above, two different people may have
two different descriptions of the design. These intuitive qualities are generally
discounted in the workplace because of their subjectivity, and because most
management training focuses on analytical methods managers are undeveloped in
this area and do not have the capacity to discuss those intuitive qualities. In the
words of Abraham Maslow, “He who is good with a hammer, tends to think
everything is a nail.” Consequently, managers may be blind to situations that call for
intuitive thinking, and approach those problems with their analytic minds
eliminating a range of possibilities. Design methods and design sensibilities together
can, “create the experiences and outcomes upon which successful businesses
34 Suri, F. J., and Hendrix, M. Developing Design Sensibilities. P. 167.

14
capitalize: clear distinction from competitors, lasting market impact, and customer
loyalty.”36
Zen – An example of an integrated design sensibility
Zen, a Japanese school of Buddhism, has an aesthetic ideal called, “ Shibumi.”
Shibumi is reserved for, “objects and experiences that exhibit all at once the very
best of everything and nothing: elegant simplicity; effortless effectiveness; beautiful
imperfection.37 In reading the previous sentence, it is difficult to come to a direct
sense of the meaning. For example, how could one identify an object that exhibits,
“The very best of everything and nothing.” In an attempt to create an object that
strives to achieve Shibumi, Zen emphasizes a series of principles listed in the table
below.
Principle Description
Koko (austerity)
Restraint, exclusion, omission, embracing the idea of ‘not
adding’ is a valid subtractive approach.
Kanso (simplicity)
Beauty and utility need not be overstated, overly decorative
or fanciful and imparts a sense of being fresh, clean, and neat.
Shizen (naturalness)
Strike a balance between being at once ‘of nature’ without
pretense, without, articifice, not forced, yet to be revealed as
intentional rather than accidental or haphazard.
Yugen
The power of suggestion is often stronger than that of full
disclosure: leaving something to the imagination creates an
irresistible aura of mystery that compels us to find answers.
Fukinsei
(imperfection,
asymmetry)
The goal of fukinsei is to invoke the natural human
inclination to seek symmetry. To employ fukinsei is to
convey the symmetrical harmony of nature by providing
something that appears to be asymmetrical.
Datsuzoku (break
from routine)
These strange timings and random locations are not merely
coincidence: neuroscientists now believe that the ability to
engineer creative breakthroughs hinges on the capacity to
synthesize and make connections between seemingly-
disparate things, and a key ingredient is time away from the
problem.
37 May, M. Zen and the Art of Simplicity. P. 180.

15
Principle Description
Seijaku (stillness,
tranquility)
It is in states of active calm, tranquility, and solitude that we
find the essence of creative energy.
Figure 4 shows a landscape
design, which can be used to
illustrate the Zen
sensibility. A more detailed
analysis can be found in the
exhibit at the end of the
document. It is a very
simple garden that balances
symmetry with some
asymmetrical elements. The
overall sense of the garden is one of stillness and tranquility. There is a sense of
restraint give by the garden in the front, but the lush green of the shrubs in the
foreground balances that restraint.
The Zen design sensibility is one approach. The purpose of a sensibility in design
thinking is to give the design thinker a set of principles to integrate into their design,
but also a critical framework to feed back into the design that they are working on.
Implementing Design Thinking in an Organization
Design Thinking offers a different approach to addressing organizational
imperatives than the traditional analytic approach. Implementing Design Thinking
will require that members of the organization adopt a different mindset that
includes:
 Willingness to acknowledge the unknown
 Willingness to incorporate the views of others
 Willingness to distribute power
Figure5 - Landscape Illustrating the Zen Design Aesthetic

16
 Willingness to experiment
Aside from this mindset, implementing Design Thinking will require that the
organization encourage the agency of its members, it will require a shift in from the
immediate to longer term problems, and adopt an experimental mindset.
Agency
In the paper, “The Second Road of Thought,” the author states that, “If we want to
get people to design their futures, our first task is to emphasize their agency. They
must feel that the world is not determinate: it is putty in their hands and they are it’s
authors.”38 Managing an organization where agency of individual employees
requires a different approach than what would be required in a hierarchy. It
distributes status, power, and decision making through the organization as opposed
to pushing it up the organization.
Address Longer Term Problems
“Any time you do that in today’s environment, you’re looking at a wicked problem,
because you’re confronting the fundamental problems of identity: who is our
company? What is our direction? What is our market? Who is our customer? These
fundamental issues are always present, but it’s very easy to avoid them by focusing
on immediate problems that are more tractable.”39
Flow of Work40
“Design organizations vary significantly from traditional firms along five key
dimensions: flow of work life; style of work; mode of thinking; source of status; and
dominant attitude.” The style of work is project based with a beginning and an end.
The mode of thinking is more inductive as opposed to analytical and requires less of
a, “Right or wrong,” mindset and requires people to keep an open mind an explore
39 Christensen, K. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. P. 53.
40 Martin, Roger. Embedding Design into Business. In Rotman on Design. University
of Toronto Press. 2013.

17
possibilities. Finally, the source of status does not come from position on the
hierarchy, it comes from the work itself and project results.
Encourage Experimentation and Respect Failure
While there is a rhetorical approach to Design Thinking, where participants attempt
to determine the correct solution. The key determinant of what is right or wrong is
not a decision made in the mind of a group or individual, it involves testing a design
or prototype in the real world. To arrive at the final solution, there is an iterative
process, and each of these iterations involves failure and learning. Participants have
to view that failure is a key component to learning and ultimate success.

19
References
Brown, T. The Merits of an Evolutionary Approach to Design. In Rotman on Design.
University of Toronto Press. 2013.
Canada, Alonso. Mapping the Future in Uncertain Times. In Rotman on Design.
Caula, R. (2014, February 28). Thomas Overthun interview, IDEO associate partner
design director. Retrieved October 13, 2015.
Christensen, Karen. Building Shared Understanding of Wicked Problems. In Rotman
on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.
Coughlan, Peter and Prokopoff, Illya. Managing Change By Design. In Rotman on
Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.
Golsby-Smith, T. The Second Road of Thought. In Rotman on Design. University of
Toronto Press. 2013.
Ideo Selected Work. (n.d.). Retrieved October 13, 2015, from
https://www.ideo.com/work/
Liedtka, Jeanne. Strategy as Design. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto
Press. 2013.
Liedtka, Jeanne. If Managers Thought Like Designers. In Rotman on Design.
Liedtka, Jeanne and Mintzberg, Henry. Time for Design. In Rotman on Design.
Liedtka, Jeanne and Ogilvie, T. Designing for Growth. Columbia University Press.
2011.
Martin, Roger. Embedding Design into Business. In Rotman on Design. University of
Martin, Roger. Designing in Hostile Territory. In Rotman on Design. University of

20
Martin, Roger. The Design of Business. In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto
Press. 2013.
May, Matthew. Zen and the Art of Simplicity. In Rotman on Design. University of
Milkowski, B. June 7, 2013. Retrieved from:
http://www.slideshare.net/BorisFriedrichMilkowski/the-bulletproof-design-brief-
a-template-for-more-successful-innovation-projects.
Owen, Charles. Design Thinking: On its Nature and Use. In Rotman on Design.
Project for St Peter's in Rome by Michelangelo Buonarroti (BackToClassics.com
Virtual Art Gallery)
http://www.backtoclassics.com/gallery/michelangelo/projectforstpetersinrome/
Pink, Daniel. A Whole New Mind. Penguin USA. New York, New York. 2005.
Raney, Colin and Jacoby, Ryan. Decisions by Design: Stop Deciding, Start Designing. .
In Rotman on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.
Reis, Eric. The Lean Startup. Crown Publishing. 2011.
Schilling, D.R. Knowledge Doubling Every 12 Months, Soon to be Every 12 Hours.
www.industrytap.com: Retrieved from: http://www.industrytap.com/knowledge-
doubling-every-12-months-soon-to-be-every-12-hours/3950.
Suri, Fulton Jane, and Hendrix, Michael. Developing Design Sensibilities. In Rotman
on Design. University of Toronto Press. 2013.
Vossoughi, S. “A Survival Guide for: The Age of Meaning. In Rotman on Design.

Design Thinking Paper 12082015

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (20)

Similar to Design Thinking Paper 12082015

Similar to Design Thinking Paper 12082015 (20)

Design Thinking Paper 12082015